5.5E The future of edition changes and revisions


log in or register to remove this ad


What does that mean?

There is a very nasty struggle that goes on in some circles between some traditionalists (some of whom are just traditionalists, but some of which are either subconscious or nothing-sub-about-it conscious racists, misogynists, homophobes and more) and people who think some elements of older games are, frankly, repugnant and were only not recognized at the time for what they were for various reasons. The latter are not going to stop confronting people about it, and the former are going to fight rearguard actions to the bitter end for various reasons of various reasons. Consider whether you really want to join the former group in that fight, given some of their motives and purposes.

Don't let me misrepresent myself here; in some respects I'm kind of traditionalist myself, but if I find myself on the same side of a fight with racists, I need a lot better a reason than "Its what I'm used to and comfortable with" before I want to be there.
 

There is a very nasty struggle that goes on in some circles between some traditionalists (some of whom are just traditionalists, but some of which are either subconscious or nothing-sub-about-it conscious racists, misogynists, homophobes and more) and people who think some elements of older games are, frankly, repugnant and were only not recognized at the time for what they were for various reasons. The latter are not going to stop confronting people about it, and the former are going to fight rearguard actions to the bitter end for various reasons of various reasons. Consider whether you really want to join the former group in that fight, given some of their motives and purposes.

Don't let me misrepresent myself here; in some respects I'm kind of traditionalist myself, but if I find myself on the same side of a fight with racists, I need a lot better a reason than "Its what I'm used to and comfortable with" before I want to be there.
I'm going to make up my own mind about what changes I like and what I don't, and not simply roll over because the internet says I should, thank you. I strongly resent the implication here that if you disagree with even parts of the cultural shift of the last few years, then you're on the same side as racists and need to re-think your opinion.

I think you should be able to use older material without being labeled for it.
 

I'm going to make up my own mind about what changes I like and what I don't, and not simply roll over because the internet says I should, thank you. I strongly resent the implication here that if you disagree with even parts of the cultural shift of the last few years, then you're on the same side as racists and need to re-think your opinion.

I think you should be able to use older material without being labeled for it.

There's a big difference between "I'm going to keep using the material I have that I don't see as negative" and "I'm going to push back on the change." Some people will argue with you about the former, but I'm talking about the latter. That's a case of deciding if that's really the hill you want to die on.
 

There's a big difference between "I'm going to keep using the material I have that I don't see as negative" and "I'm going to push back on the change." Some people will argue with you about the former, but I'm talking about the latter. That's a case of deciding if that's really the hill you want to die on.
Well, I'm talking about the former. That's where I stand.
 


Makes sense Goblinoids were Fey related in actual myth. And most Goblinoids are Fey descended not actual fey. What with the whole conquest by their god thing.
I'd say it depends on the world you are playing in.

Am I playing on Earth where Norse and Celtic Mythology are a thing? Or am I playing in Faerun or Krynn or something where some evil god created the goblins?

But yes. WotC can change whatever they want. And Evil Gods didnt create any form of warlike race and everything comes from the realm of the faeries instead and got corrupted. Good lord, look how the "fixed" Lolth.....

In for a penny, in for a pound.
 
Last edited:

Staffan

Legend
5E was an apology edition, and part of that "apology" was taking the lore back to some old-skool places without really thinking through The Implications. I haven't read the 2E Orc description in the MM but I'm guessing it's less full of racist dogwhistles than 5E's one is, not more. Not intentionally, sure, but it shows an issue.
I remember reacting pretty strongly to the passage about alignment in the 5e PHB. Specifically: "The evil deities who created other races, though, made those races to serve them. Those races have strong inborn tendencies that match the nature of their gods. Most orcs share the violent, savage nature of the orc god, Gruumsh. and are thus inelined toward evil. Even if an orc chooses a good alignment, it struggles against its innate tendencies for its entire life. (Even half-orcs feel the lingering pull of the orc god's influence.)"

Fortunately, this bit has been memory holed in more recent printings as well as on D&D Beyond.
 

I'd say it depends on the world you are playing in.

Am I playing on Earth where Norse and Celtic Mythology are a thing? Or am I playing in Faerun or Krynnor something where some evil god created the goblins?

But yes. WotC can change whatever they want. And Evil Gods didnt create any form of warlike race and everything comes from the realm of the faeries instead and got corrupted. Good lord, look how the "fixed" Lolth.....

In for a penny, in for a pound.

What do you mean Lolth is the same as always from what I know.

Goblin's are largely the same they just have different origins now. It helps differ them from Orcs more now who were created by a god. The Goblins instead were conquered by a god.
 

What do you mean Lolth is the same as always from what I know.

Goblin's are largely the same they just have different origins now. It helps differ them from Orcs more now who were created by a god. The Goblins instead were conquered by a god.

According the lastest Drizzt books: In Faerun Lolth was good. The Drow acting evil corrupted her. Currently she's turned her back on it all and her demons secretly run things in her name. She still grants spells if a priestess asks but inst requiring prayers and sacrfices etc because she just doesnt care one way or the other.

This is what is about to cause the big civil war in Menzo as the head priestess now know the real history of the drow and her demons run things in her name since she cant be bothered to care, and if this info gets out well.... big changes for the Drow.
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
I remember reacting pretty strongly to the passage about alignment in the 5e PHB. Specifically: "The evil deities who created other races, though, made those races to serve them. Those races have strong inborn tendencies that match the nature of their gods. Most orcs share the violent, savage nature of the orc god, Gruumsh. and are thus inelined toward evil. Even if an orc chooses a good alignment, it struggles against its innate tendencies for its entire life. (Even half-orcs feel the lingering pull of the orc god's influence.)"

Fortunately, this bit has been memory holed in more recent printings as well as on D&D Beyond.
Yeah, that aged poorly.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
What do you mean Lolth is the same as always from what I know.

Goblin's are largely the same they just have different origins now. It helps differ them from Orcs more now who were created by a god. The Goblins instead were conquered by a god.
Yeah, the new lore is largely additive. The not necessarily evil Duergar are less a change from MToF, and more "MToF is the standard Dwarves racist views about their deep underground cousins." Evil Duergar tyrants are still doable, but their people are more complex moral agents.
 

According the lastest Drizzt books: In Faerun Lolth was good. The Drow acting evil corrupted her. Currently she's turned her back on it all and her demons secretly run things in her name. She still grants spells if a priestess asks but inst requiring prayers and sacrfices etc because she just doesnt care one way or the other.

This is what is about to cause the big civil war in Menzo as the head priestess now know the real history of the drow and her demons run things in her name since she cant be bothered to care, and if this info gets out well.... big changes for the Drow.
Hmm interesting. Will look into this.
 

Hussar

Legend
Yeah, contradicting material within the edition is a bit of a bigger deal. It makes it harder to compartmentalize (which is my primary way of dealing with changes in the game I don't care for, and which has been increasingly more difficult in the last few years). Of course, being surrounded online by people who apparently love everything WotC's doing doesn't make it any easier.
But that's a bit unreasonable don't you think considering that in the space of 5e, previously, we'd had two or even three editions pass. Not expecting changes to lore within an edition is a bit trickier when your edition is going to last more than 10 years - if you consider the update an update and not a new edition (which I'm SURE will become a thing to argue about for the next decade) - then it might be insisting that lore be frozen in place for 20 years? That's not reasonable.
 

Hussar

Legend
But, this whole goblin thing really does sort of line up with what I said before.

Does anyone actually care about the origins of monsters? I mean, sure, you might like to read about it or whatnot, but, does anyone actually care? Are goblins suddenly not usable in Lost Mines of Phandelver because now they have a Fae origin? Does anyone have to rewrite the module in any way, shape or form? Would I suddenly need to rewrite Caves of Chaos because goblins are, many, many generations ago, descended from Fae?

This is my point about tempest in a teacup. Frankly, who cares? It's not going to make the slightest difference in anyone's game. You can run exactly the same modules, in exactly the same way before and after. It's just a nifty bit of flavor text that might lead to more stuff down the line. I imagine that if they release new modules featuring goblins, they might play up the Fae aspect. But, again, there's a million different ways to do that.

It's really funny to me. Paizo completely rewrites goblins and gets nothing but a huge pat on the back for it. WotC does far, far less to change goblins and they are abandoning fans. :erm:
 


Mister_Fish

Explorer
The number of people I've seen praise A5E that has orcs driven by passion, celestial tieflings, halflings with claws and a burrowing speed, and so many more things (it's a really creative take on a lot of fantasy races, highly recommend even if you don't want all that crunch) and simultaneously be mad at floating ASIs and adjustments to monster lore is higher than expected, I'm similarly perplexed. Is it just because it's made by the site and gets a pass on Old Guard sensibilities because it's an in-crowd product?

Is it because they're just ignoring the lore for the crunch they want, which is the exact thing they could be doing with WotC product but aren't because... reasons?
 


Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top